Post by onlyMark on Mar 1, 2017 7:25:39 GMT

The renown establishment of the RAF are pondering 'moving with the times' and banning women from wearing skirts as it is deemed to be discriminatory to sections of their personnel. Apparently they have been receiving purely outside pressure to rectify this imbalance rather than coming from within the RAF staff who are affected and who have not voiced this issue.I presume they also currently have separate toilets for the sexes within their bases but I wonder if this also may change and follow the pattern of allowing those who are gender fluid to pick whichever one they want to use at the time ("noting or relating to a person whose gender identity or gender expression is not fixed and shifts over time or depending on the situation").I'm not sure what the reaction would be in places that practise this if I (a hairy arsed male) for example decide for that month I want to be known as a female and use those facilities rather than the male one.

Coming back to the skirt subject, is banning them the solution? What confuses me is as trousers are male and skirts female, wouldn't that force personnel to relinquish all choice and then only conform to the male apparel? Forcing 'maleness' on people is surely not a good thing? I feel the solution may be a third way and introduce culottes for any who wish to wear them. Plus giving all personnel independent of sex (that they identify with at that moment) the option of wearing either a skirt, trousers or culottes any day and in any combination they feel comfortable with.Examples should then be set by the Regimental Sergeant Majors who rotate through the options on a day to day basis. I think my solution is workable.

One last thing, I notice Facebook allows you to identify as something else other than male or female as part of your profile. For simplicity I wonder if just using male, female and other is the most pragmatic solution, except of course for those who would put 'other' who wish their specific category to be known.Recently an extra twenty or so categories were added making the current list -

Post by onlyMark on Mar 1, 2017 11:49:17 GMT

Post by kerouac2 on Mar 1, 2017 12:17:05 GMT

I was wondering myself why they even bother with gender. Wouldn't the ultimate modernisation just be to eliminate it completely as a concept?

Dating sites would still need want to know what you're looking for to optimise their services, and the medical profession would need an inventory of internal organs but apart from that it doesn't seem like it would really matter.

The fact that most of the places in the world still have completely separate toilet facilities for the two main divisions of humanity is already a huge waste of space and resources.

Post by onlyMark on Mar 1, 2017 13:52:18 GMT

It certainly is. Why double up on everything? Just have one for all (and all for one?).Then in time we may develop to have a society akin to the Gethens in The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. Le Guin - "Individuals on Gethen are "ambisexual", with no fixed gender identity."

Post by kerouac2 on Mar 1, 2017 14:05:44 GMT

One address that my department occupied for a few years had unisex toilets -- it had three (completely closed) toilet cubicles and three sinks. There were 12 of us, split 6/6. We adapted to the situation immediately. After all, we had no choice. But it was funny when we had visitors to the office who needed to use the restroom. It would be indicated to them, and they would walk in and most of them would then walk out almost immediately to ask "which one am I supposed to use?" Silly.

Post by bixaorellana on Mar 1, 2017 15:16:06 GMT

There is a really excellent reason why there should be separate toilets for people who sit down to pee and those who stand up. I once worked in a place where the public men's toilet needed repair, meaning that the women's public toilet became unisex for the day. Within three hours it absolutely reeked of urine.

Post by kerouac2 on Mar 1, 2017 15:22:14 GMT

There was never a complaint about that at my office. I suppose that all of us men were responsible and well aware that we were sharing.

However, there were running jokes about particularly one person (thank god it was not me) who would leave an enduring aroma after certain bodily functions. Such things could not be hidden since often one person was entering the room as another person left it.

Post by onlyMark on Mar 1, 2017 18:33:15 GMT

And as for the OP, no woman would be put out by "having" to wear trousers, we all do 90% of the time anyway.

Which ponders the question of why make a ban rather than leaving the choice up to those who do wear skirts? It could be just for conformity but you can be certain there will be those who will make their voice known purely for the reason of being forced to do something - I know I would, but that is me. Especially when it is not those affected by the change who have pushed for it, i.e. female RAF personnel. It is those who feel aggrieved on behalf of the RAF females, offended by proxy they are, who are pushing.

As for toilets, imagine this scenario.I identify as a female. I dress, speak and appear as a female. I have budding breasts due to hormone treatment. My mannerisms are feminine and my mental outlook is looking at the world through the eyes of a female. But, I've not yet had an operation (as to get one anyway in the UK I have to 'be' female for a certain length of time to show commitment) and still possess my manhood.Which toilet should I go to?If I promise to sit down, can I go in the girls' one?In effect, do you have a right to ban me from the female toilets because I have a penis? Even though everything else about me is female.

Next question - if I am 'gender fluid' (a person who does not identify with a single fixed gender and has a fluctuating gender identity), do I have the right to choose which toilet I go in depending on what I feel that day? And you can't do a damn thing about it because you will then be accused of gender bias?"The Human Rights Campaign Foundation and Gender Spectrum use the term gender-expansive to convey "a wider, more flexible range of gender identity and/or expression than typically associated with the binary gender system".A person who is genderfluid prefers to remain flexible about their gender identity rather than committing to a single gender. They may fluctuate between genders or express multiple genders at the same time.Some genderqueer people identify as a male woman or a female man, or combine genderqueer with another gender option."

I still have a penis, by the way, but tomorrow I will be using the female toilets at work or school or the shopping mall because I know when I wake up in the morning I will feel more female than male.And don't make me wear a skirt if I do.

So, in conclusion, I have rights. You will be accused of gender related offences if you, through your common sense, refuse me something.

Post by mossie on Mar 1, 2017 20:00:19 GMT

I just put in another place that the politically correct prats now run the country. This is yet another example.

When I was running the asphalt company at work this business started to rear its pretty awful head. I said it is fine to have females working on the gangs so long as they conformed to the dress code of working stripped to the waist in hot weather, but boots were also mandatory at all times. Walking on hot asphalt in pretty shoes would make one hop about.

Post by bjd on Mar 2, 2017 6:50:19 GMT

One thing that strikes me about this discussion and is shown by Mark's post about choosing a toilet depending on how one feels that day is that it seems that, at least in Western societies, we are moving more and more into a society of little egotistical bubbles. Everyone one around us is expected to adapt to how I feel on a certain day, society is supposed to provide facilities so that I am never uncomfortable using a different toilet (as an example), university courses and lectures are never supposed to make me feel uncomfortable. How much of this is political correctness gone overboard to make up for a lack of consideration and equality in the not so distant past and how much is the pendulum swinging too far in the direction of egotism and social media where people spend their time saying how they feel and not what they think.

Personally, I don't care if I have to use a toilet that was also used by men. It happens all the time in my house, in many restaurants, hostels,campsites, etc. Big deal.

Post by mossie on Mar 2, 2017 10:36:04 GMT

Perhaps this is the place to describe a toilet we had in Egypt. This was just outside the bar area and was the usual corrugated iron shack with the roof raise about a foot above the walls for ventilation. the business equipment comprised a wooden bench with a couple of bum size holes and strategically placed buckets in one compartment. I the general area was a row of 5 gallon drums with the tops cut off for liquids only. By about 10 on a good evening these would be overflowing so good footwear was an absolute necessity.

An interesting touch was provided by one of the long serving NCOs who had had too much sun. He had a habit of hanging by his feet from the roof beams, I should add that there was no lighting, to add to the general chaos.

Post by mossie on Mar 2, 2017 10:44:24 GMT

Re Marks comment on stilettos. One of the jobs I supervised was the surfacing of a new island platform at Colchester station in the early '60's, access for our asphalt was by pushing it in wheelbarrows across the running railway line, with a railway man acting as traffic control. The platform was kept in use and it was hilarious to see young ladies in their newly fashionable stiletto heels trying to walk on freshly laid material. They sometimes had to be rescued having lost one or both shoes.

Post by mossie on Mar 2, 2017 21:20:06 GMT

Returning to Marks original post regarding the RAF requiring banning skirts. That is most assuredly not my air force. Whatever next, it was bad enough in the old days, trying to get into the stiff serge knickers.

Post by lagatta on Mar 3, 2017 1:49:10 GMT

Lizzyfaire, have you been watching X-company? I'm not at all a television series watcher, but I've been following that.

Yes, the Canadian women's uniforms have skirts (in the offices, of course). But while there were a lot of historically-documented aspects, there was the rather ludicrous ease with which they flew across the Atlantic from Ontario to England, and from there to France, as the sea and air battles raged.